首页 > 题库 > 广东工业大学
选择学校
A B C D F G H J K L M N Q S T W X Y Z

According to BT’s futurologist, Ian Pearson, these are among the developments scheduled for the first few decades of the new millennium^ period of 1,000 years), when supercomputers will dramatically accelerate: progress in all areas of life. Pearson has(1)together to work of hundreds of researchers around the world to produce a(2)millennium technology calendar that gives the latest dates when we can expect hundreds of key(3)and discoveries to take place. Some of the biggest developments will be in medicine, including an(4)life expectancy and dozens of artificial organs(5)into use between now and 2040.Pearson also(6)a breakthrough in computer human links. "By linking(7)to our nervous system, computers could pick up(8)we feel and, hopefully, simulate(9)too so that we can start to(10)full sensory environments, rather like the holidays in Total Recall or the Star Trek holodeck," he says.But that, Pearson points(11), is only the start of man-machine(12):"It will be the beginning of the long process of integration that will(13)lead to a fully electronic human before the end of the next century. “(14)his research, Pearson is able to put dates to most of the breakthroughs that can be predicted. However, there are still no (15)for when faster-than-light travel will be(16), or when human cloning will be perfected, or when time travel will be possibly.But he does(17)social problems as a result of technological advances. A boom in neighborhood surveillance cameras will, for example,(18)problems in 2010, while the arrival of synthetic(19)robots will mean people may not be able to(20)between their human friends and the droids. And home appliances will also become so smart that controlling and operating them will result in the breakout of a new psychological disorder- kitchen rage.

查看试题

In the idealized version of how science is done, facts about the world are waiting to be observed and collected by objective researchers who use the scientific method to carry out their work. But in the everyday practice of science, discovery frequently follows an ambiguous and complicated route. We aim to be objective, but we cannot escape the context of our unique life experience. Prior knowledge and interest influence what we experience, what we think our experiences mean, and the subsequent actions we take. Opportunities for misinterpretation, error, and self-deception abound.Consequently, discovery claims should be thought of as protoscience. Similar to newly staked mining claims, they are full of potential. But it takes collective scrutiny and acceptance to transform a discovery claim into a mature discovery. This is the credibility process, through which the individual researcher’s me, here, now becomes the community’s anyone, anywhere, anytime. Objective knowledge is the goal, not the starting point.Once a discovery claim becomes public, the discoverer receives intellectual credit. But, unlike with mining claims, the community takes control of what happens next. Within the complex social structure of the scientific community, researchers make discoveries; editors and reviewers act as gatekeepers by controlling the publication process; other scientists use the new finding to suit their own purposes; and finally, the public(including other scientists)receives the new discovery and possibly accompanying technology. As a discovery claim works it through the community, the interaction and confrontation between shared and competing beliefs about the science and the technology involved transforms an individual’s discovery claim into the community’s credible discovery.Two paradoxes exist throughout this credibility process. First, scientific work tends to focus on some aspect of prevailing Knowledge that is viewed as incomplete or incorrect. Little reward accompanies duplication and confirmation of what is already known and believed. The goal is new-search, not re-search. Not surprisingly, newly published discovery claims and credible discoveries that appeal to be important and convincing will always be open to challenge and potential modification pf refutation by future researchers. Second, novelty itself frequently provokes disbelief. Nobel Laureate and physiologist Albert Azent-Gyorgyi once described discovery as “seeing what everybody has seen and thinking what nobody has thought.” But thinking what nobody else has thought and telling others what they have missed may not change their views. Sometimes years are required for truly novel discovery claims to be accepted and appreciated.In the end, credibility “happens” to a discovery claim—a process that corresponds to what philosopher Annette Baier has described as the commons of the mind. “We reason together challenge, revise, and complete each other’s reasoning and each other’s conceptions of reason.”1. Paragraph 1 states that the process of discovery has the characteristics of( ).2. Paragraph 2 suggests that credibility process requires( ).3. Paragraph 3 shows that a discovery claim becomes credible after it( ).4. Albert Azent-Gyorgyi would most likely agree that( ).5. Which of the following would be the best title of this passage?

查看试题

暂未登录

成为学员

学员用户尊享特权

老师批改作业做题助教答疑 学员专用题库高频考点梳理

本模块为学员专用
学员专享优势
老师批改作业 做题助教答疑
学员专用题库 高频考点梳理
成为学员